Abstract:

My dissertation focuses on the higher education system, and in particular, the impact of affirmative action on the admissions gap between rich and poor minorities, and the effect of tenure on teaching quality.

There is a contentious debate over affirmative action in college admissions. Although much of the economics literature has studied the impact of affirmative action on racial diversity on campuses and minority admission rates, no study has shown whether the rich within a minority group benefit more from affirmative action than the poor, or whether ending affirmative action has any effect on this advantage. In the chapter of my dissertation entitled "Affirmative Action and the Admissions Gap between Rich and Poor Minorities," I use data spanning 1992 to 2007 from the University of California, Berkeley--where affirmative action was eliminated in 1998--and find that under affirmative action, the admissions gap between rich and poor minorities was consistently large. Blacks in the top income quartile had an admission rate up to 24 percentage points higher than blacks in the bottom income quartile, and Hispanics in the top income quartile had an admission rate up to 22 percentage points higher than Hispanics coming from the bottom income quartile. In contrast, whites from the top income quartile did not have a consistent admissions advantage over whites in the bottom income quartile during the period of affirmative action. The admissions gap for minorities virtually disappeared after affirmative action was abolished and race-neutral admissions criteria were used. I also show a rise in the graduation rates of Hispanics entering school when affirmative action was eliminated, while the graduation rates of blacks entering at the same time fell, though only in the short-term; in the long-run graduation rates rose for both minorities. I argue that my admissions results can be explained by Berkeley's move from race-based affirmative action to class-based affirmative action in 1998.

There is also a debate over tenure in higher education. Many view the institution of tenure as vital to promoting academic freedom and open intellectual discourse in universities, but some critics argue that this academic freedom comes at the expense of teaching quality. Given the rising costs of a college education and the declining performance of U.S. college graduates, this is an important policy question--does the institution of tenure lower the effectiveness of teachers in teaching the skills necessary to succeed in a dynamic global economy? In the chapter of my dissertation entitled "Teacher Tenure and Teaching Quality," I contribute to this debate by using data on student course evaluations from a major research university. I find that a professor's student course evaluation scores do not fall after receiving tenure, and could actually increase by 2.2 percent. This result is consistent with the literature on research productivity over the life-cycle of academics, which finds that research output declines as professors age. I hypothesize that teaching quality can improve as professors substitute time away from research and toward teaching.